About your Search

20121112
20121120
STATION
MSNBCW 21
MSNBC 17
CNBC 15
CNN 14
CNNW 14
KQEH (PBS) 3
WRC (NBC) 2
CSPAN 1
CSPAN2 1
KNTV (NBC) 1
KPIX (CBS) 1
KQED (PBS) 1
KRCB (PBS) 1
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 109
Search Results 64 to 108 of about 109 (some duplicates have been removed)
party should take president obama up on his offer. you have speaker boehner saying, let's get compromise. this is the time to bring that debt down. we seriously have to do it. i don't think anyone disputes that, but it has to be a mix of spending cuts and the revenue. and the one figure that i'd like to add here is how much revenue we get by just going back to the clinton levels at $250,000 and above. that's $700 billion in tenures. that's what draws people to that number when you add that in and then close some loopholes and subsidies and do the budget cuts, we have already done a trillion. you can get to the $4 trillion that most economists say would at least lead us to the path to reduce debt over ten years. >> because it is so much money and because it would be so relatively painless for people who have income above $250,000 to see that change go back, because bill crystal is saying this now, because the president is clear that's what he's running on, it feels that's clear that's within the realm of the possible. but what else didn't previously peel like it was in the realm of possib
all the leverage in the world. go ahead boehner yap yap yap, yap. six weeks from now i win on almost every issue if i do nothing. they're going to buckle. i won't say that i won't negotiate. those things are on the table. the incomes tax is not on the table. also on the table. estate tax. it's slated to go up to 39%. it's at 35%. then you have carried interest and corporation taxes. why in the world are we talking about cutting corporate taxes. i'll go in the option opposite direction. i'll take away loopholes. we're not going to give you what you want. i won you lost. how about spending cuts to tax increases. president obama keeps saying i want to do $3 of spending cut for every $1 in tax increases. that was before the election. if i'm president obama i say here is the new formula. now we're going to do $1 in spending cuts for every $3 in tax increases. you know why? i won. you lost. if you like we can do it again in 2014. would i settle for 2-for-20? i would settle for that. but i wouldn't go 3-to-1 against me. who would do that numbers that, unless you want to move. 3-to-1 against
that can be had. i think both the president and speaker boehner have indicated they're willing to give that a shot. >> thank you, gentlemen. good to see both of you and thanks for your work on behalf of the american people. congressman steve nortorette of ohio and congressman john ridgelle from virginia. >>> well, it could still push this economy over the edge. what president obama can do in his second term, next. is, nyquil doesn't unstuff your nose. what? [ male announcer ] it doesn't have a decongestant. no way. [ male announcer ] sorry. alka-seltzer plus fights your worst cold symptoms plus has a fast acting decongestant to relieve your stuffy nose. [ sighs ] thanks! [ male announcer ] you're welcome. that's the cold truth! [ male announcer ] alka-seltzer plus. ♪ oh what a relief it is! ♪ [ male announcer ] to learn more about the cold truth and save $1 visit alka-seltzer on facebook. we have so much technology in our store to really show the customers what's going on with their bodies. now you can feel what happens as we raise your sleep number setting and allow the bed to con
with boehner. but might be the beginning of bargain point. but you get 820 billion. so there's another 800 billion. at this point, the others are saying no cuts to medicare, social security, or anything else. and they have to find another 800 billion. >> the president did not say -- >> we know he has to cut some of those. >> my guess is the gop is saying they're looking at a trillion dollars as the number. >> and you saw what paul ryan said. the house was re-elected. so people re-elected those people in the house for a reason. it's a nonstarter. it's not going to happen. it's not going to be 1.6 billion. 1.6 trillion. to get to four trillion, that would be 2.4. so we said that. he'll go not 3-1 like simpson bowles. he's go one and a half to one. >> that's not going to happen either. >> but what bothers me -- >> the problem is nothing is going to happen. >> what bothers me is i do think you can get to a point where you raise taxes too much and you don't cut spending enough, where you're just funding entitlements by raising taxes and you don't do anything about it. if he had his way, i reall
mcconnell, house speaker john boehner and nancy pelosi. so, will we get a deal? one man getting a lot of attention is erskine bowles. did you ever think your name would be part of pop culture? you are the bowles in simpson bowles. >> better be simpson bowles than bowles simpson since everybody knows him by his initials here in washington. >> so, when you talk about things, sacred cows, untouchables, whatever the word might be, in your proposal, the one paul ryan decided not to back, the one barack obama decided not to back, you had an increase in the federal gasoline tax. caps on mortgage interest. charitable donations and retirement contributions. these were all top choices. you also increased the eligibility age for medicare and social security. reduced benefits for wealthier seniors. some of those things average democrats and republicans say they agree on, other, they loathe them. is there anything that should be untouchable? >> the problems are real, no easy way out. we've got to come up with at least $4 trillion of deficit reduction and that's not the maximum amount we need to do
they acted. and the question is whether they'll have the courage of their convictions. speaker boehner appears to be torn by this. mitch mcconnell, on the other hand, appears to be concerned about winning a primary in kentucky. i can only recall his tactics that tried to mug the president, apparently, will continue. so this is a very interesting question. there are clearly people within the republican party who don't want them to be more flexible, who want to go down in flames. and that's the key issue. there are republicans who will be running for re-election for the senate next time pp, republican members of the house who understand they've got to be more flexible. and it's going to be interesting to watch. i hope they will fine the courage to break with the tea party. to date i'm not encouraged. to date the tea party continues to have that veto. >> now, compare this aftermath of an election with 2010, after the midterm election. what is the difference in terms of the political landscape and leverage of the democratic party? >> well, clearly the democratic message won. let me point o
you for joining us. i want to start out by playing two bits of sound from both speaker boehner and president obama on staking out what they would like to see in a deal to get rid of this fiscal cliff. >> raising tax rates will slow down our ability to create the jobs that everyone says they want. >> what i'm not going to do is to extend bush tax cuts for the wealthiest 2% that we can't afford. >> gosh, that doesn't sound like you all are anywhere closer to a deal now than you were prior to the election. congressman price, where is there room for compromise here? >> there is certainly room for negotiation on a real solution, and a real solution includes both revenue increases and spending reductions. the reason we have concern about what the president is talking about and what my friends on the other side of the aisle have talked about is that it doesn't solve the problem. if we take the president's deal, you know how many days that pays for. eight days. not months. eight days. we neat to look at increasing revenue through pro-growth policies. >> not through tax hikes, correct?
't happen under reaga un reagan. it did happen under bush. >> there is agreement all around that boehner wants a deal. the speaker wants a deal, but he cannot sell a deal, even with the goodwill that he thinks he and the president have on that right now, unless there is real graham ruddman type, real requirements, that these things go in simultaneously. and that's what jim baker wrote about recently, who's had that experience, of fashioning exactly that kind of deal. >> it's important, though, that -- >> you have to cut spending in the future. >> you can raise taxes with one congress. but it takes five congresses to cut spending. >> it's important to keep the focus on growth. not taxes, not spending cuts. you know, the goal here is to get our growth from, you know, one plus percent, up to three and four percent. if we don't get growth going, none of this will matter at all. it's really important as the president frames this that he frames it as growth, and therefore i need this tax increase for these people. this kind of spending cuts here. because it will leverage this kind of growth. >
the microphone with pelosi and with reid and boehner at the side saying that revenue is on the table, but when the talks ramp back up after thanksgiving, is this an issue to be real negotiation or dig-in time? >> i hope it is time for a negotiation. look, if there is one thing that we learned from the president's campaign, he promised to raise taxes on the wealthy. and here is a news flash to the republicans out there, elections have consequences, and that is what he wants to do, and i'm sure he is going to accomplish some of that, but on either side when you dig in before the negotiations start, not only does it look bad, it makes the markets go up and down, and it creates instability, and insecurity among the people out here in the country feeling the pain and the brunt of some of the economic policies and the fact of the matter is that both sides need to come into it with some level of give and take, and that is how you govern and get it done, and if the president is going to ak kccomplish the polis that he did in first term that he promised in the second, he is going to have to get some of
've within boehnered will cause them to lose the international support they have. it's one of those 50-50 chance things but it's looking like everybody is looking fair way out. the question is, in a region like this, is there a way out. >> schieffer: well allen pizzey, who always shows up in the worst place where's the workforce things are going on, thank you. cbs news correspondent charlie dag tais on the other side of the border in gaza. charlie, bring us up to speed. what is the situation like there. >> reporter: well, the mood here is extremely teps, and the biggest worry is this dangerous and unpredictable situation may be about to get worse. as we drove through the northern part gaza strip, we were shown a couple of bombed out buildings, and one looked to be three or four stories high. it completely collapsed in a densely populated neighborhood. we also saw crater craters that looked to be in vacant lots. they may have been targeted because these are the areas suspected to hold rocket launching sites. the israel military has also started targeting media centers, one of the transm
to every debail of his plan. house speaker, john boehner, wants to keep all the bush tax cuts in place. he's starting to talk about closing up tax loopholes. conservative pundit and weekly standard editor bill kristol said it's time for republicans to come so some sort of compromise. >> conservative movement has to pull back, let people float new ideas, let's have a serious debate. don't scream and yell when one person says it won't kill the country if we raise taxes a little bit on millionaires. it really won't, i don't think. i don't understand why republicans don't take obama's offer? >> cnn's senior congressional correspondent dana bash is live for us in washington, d.c. what do you make of his comments? >> soledad, look, bill kristol is not an elected official. he doesn't get a vote. but he is a very influential gop voice here in washington. and around the country. and for him to tell republicans it wouldn't kill to them to agree to tax increases for millionaires. it's a big deal. and we heard some similar talk from republicans who do have a vote like senator bob corker. listen to thi
to bottom here. it's just that there's not as many. >> if you saw a headline, boehner-obama to agree to long-term solution, you would hit buy first on com? >> we no longer have to worry about rising above? >> i think we'll see that as a joke. >> only up 3% to 5% between now and tuesday. that's not their focus. >> i understand. >> but remember when germany went down, when the german forces went down. those are countries that are dominated by rich people. a lot of those companies are plutocrasies. i think when their market went down, they said holy cow, maybe we ought to do something, maybe monty ought to get together, our country t.a.r.p., that first vote, i think people said, okay, i'm going to have to work the rest of my life, there goes my 401(k) and the congressmen rise above. i hope it doesn't take that. i hope it didn't. >> we do have some media news today, viacom is out with some numbers. >> viacom is not as bad as i had feared. the market numbers down about 6% for the company which is perhaps a little bit better than might have been expected. if you take a look over the last few weeks
and overspending problem and not an under taxing problem. we heard from speaker john boehner. he said that revenue is on the table. the issue here is that president obama has said he wants to increase tax rates on wealthy americans. the speaker and house republicans are still not on board with increasing tax rates, although perhaps closing some loopholes to raise some revenue, and even though there's a lot of kind of kumbaya going on here, suzanne, there's still a lot of tough work that needs to be done. they're still maybe punting on some of the important issues like tax reform and entitlement reform, but they'll be dealing with the fiscal cliff here in the near term. >> it's probably difficult to tell, but we see these pictures, and it's very common, right? you get about 30 seconds to see them all in a room together. they're patting each other on the back, smiling, and shaking hands, that kind of thick. do we have any sense of whether or not there were any different kind of tone or language when they were meeting behind closed doors that gives us a sense that maybe this is real? >> you know, i t
engaged and motivated to keep making the case. now, i do think that speaker boehner did say that he was open to new revenue, it is an open question about how many folks in this caucus will be. there are a lot of republicans, tom coburn, the rock-ribbed conservative senator from oklahoma has also been very open about it. so i think that you are seeing some people who are very firmly on the political right who are saying that, "look, we're willing to give an inch on revenues if we can also make some reforms on the spending side." >> i think we're missing the point when we look at the political parties. we should keep our eye on what's happening to working families. and working families have been hurting since at least the 1970s. and they've been hanging on by, you know, one manner or another that is really not fundamental. the fundamental way families make money is through work and savings and buying a home and accumulating wealth. but what's been happening is that first you had wives and mothers that went into the workforce. now, ultimately this was a good thing for women to be in th
this to be a juicy story as opposed to writing about white house budget negotiations with john boehner, particularly in the last 12 hours as we have learned about an fbi agent who was investigating the case initially who sent a shirtless photo of himself to one of the women involved and now these 30,000 e-mails, suspect e-mails between the general who had been commanding the war effort in afghanistan, general allen, and jill kelley, one of the women involved in this, which make me ask the question, when does he have time to run the war? >> right, right. i want to ask you, too, watching pictures of the white house in the briefing room and jay carney's going to step up to the podium, get a lot of questions, you can bet a lot on the scandal and the implications and this certainly has to be quite a distraction, to say the very least, the white house. how do they get on top of this? how do they get ahead of the story in some way? clearly they're not going to want the president to deal with these questions tomorrow at the press conference. >> well, it's inevitable, you can put money on it president obama
when you saw nancy pelosi out there. you saw john boehner out there saying we are hopeful we can get a deal done. and the market had a positive reaction to that. yet it lost that upside throughout the day, teetered back and forth between positive and negative territory. finally, closing the day out positive, so perhaps that suggests that maybe we are a little bit closer. but here's the thing, randi, they've got to get something done. they've got to solve this issue. because if not, the consequences are severe. >> but you listen to some people, and they suggest that fears of fallen off the cliff are overblown. what are the real consequences here? >> the real consequences are another recession. i mean, i can tell you every ceo that i'm talking to right now says i'm not making major decisions. i'm waiting. i'm standing by the sidelines. i can't hire a lot of people, i can't invest in a lot of infrastructure because i don't know what the landscape is going to be in the next 45 days. i don't know what the landscape is going to be in the next three months. so there's a lot of holdup. now,
can pass the alternative. but it's your problem to get the votes. and boehner would be well put not to try to cut a deal with obama but instead to say paul ryan's going to bring a solution to the fix, we're going to gather votes for it. i guarantee you, you'll get the right to have a democratic substitute. and if you can get enough republicans to vote for it, terrific. but they do not have an obligation to concede that the only mandate in washington is the president's. >> you're talking about chains hiring people for 29 hours. i'm hearing that from small business owners across pensacola. >> yeah. >> my own district. on election night i got three different e-mails from small business owners going it's sad -- and i said this on the air a couple days ago. they said i'm going to have to put these people on for less than 30 hours and i'm going to lose my best people. i can choose to do that or fire six, seven people because my margins are so small i'm fighting to keep my business open. >> you track the number of layoffs and closures in the first week since the election, it's sobering
in congress are another. they have to come together. speaker boehner said he's willing to entertain more revenue. the president should take him up on that offer and they ought to come together and find some way through this. the republican party has got to take a good luook at what its future holds but a good start will be coming together to solve this problem. >> governor, nancy pelosi of course out this morning says she's going to run again for some leadership in the congress. is that a signal that the white house is going to remain more partisan perhaps than some hope? >> actually, i don't think so. you know, nancy pelosi was the one who produced the votes for the financial bailout. you all recall that. there weren't republican votes even when president bush proposed it and secretary paulson. nancy found the votes. nancy is good at finding the votes out of our progressive wing and the president will need votes from our progressive wing and nancy is a good person to do that. >> we'll see how things go down this afternoon and later in the week. governor, lanhee good to see you back. don
republicans. listen who what house speaker john boehner said about that throwing cold water on it. >> at this point i think that the standing committees of the house whether they be the oversight committee or the intelligence committee are working diligently on these issues, and at this point i think that's appropriate. >> now, what john mccain and his colleagues are arguing is that there's too much stove piping going on. there are too many committees, and twoul today is a good example. there are hearings going on all over capitol hill and then probably will continue to be. they think it all should be streamlined into one committee, but, suzanne, using the term watergate, using the term coverup, saying what did he know, when did he know it, talking about the president, not exactly a way to get bipartisan support for something that, you know, democrats clearly don't want. it is absolutely -- you mentioned at the beginning, very, very tense, particularly between these two old rivals, john mccain and president obama. >> not the way to bite -- get the bipartisanship going. okay, dana.
of the fact that they're worried about what's not going to happen. after the election, boehner came out, thought he'd move some, and then obama came out the next day, and in the early part of his speech, he looked good. and all of a sudden he starts digging in. if you look at what the stock market did, it immediately dropped. came back a little bit that day, but immediately dropped. that's what's in people's minds and it's scaring the heck out of them. we have to have some solution. >> when we look to europe, it's a very similar scenario. we have all these issues revolving around greece and maybe to a lesser extent, spain, and it seems about the same dynamics. that it isn't results oriented, it's idle the car and hope things get better while you're sitting in there, hunkered down. >> that's absolutely the case. they have been spinning their wheels. fortunately for us, we've gotten away from the european situation, somewhat. because it looks like our economy can gain some traction. but it's immediately going to grind to a halt if we don't see something. >> you know, there's one area, the
.6 would be 1.5 to 1, when he was with boehner, 800, wanted another 4. >> you were in the room so you know. >> first of all, since we talk about bowles-simpson so much, bowles-simpson has a 1:1 ratio. >> it doesn't. >> i thought it's 1:4. >> it's 1:3. >> in the way the bowles-simpson frame was put out something people didn't realize was that in terms of the revenue number they weren't counting the expiration of the high income tax cuts which they proposed to get rid of. apples to apples, in terms of the way people are currently adding up their math, it's approximately a 1:1 ratio. >> erskine bowles said you should look at 3:1 in terms of spending cuts to revenue. >> i'm just saying what was in bowles-simpson. >> let's not forget about growth, we need to stimulate growth and a lot of it on the innovation side. >> david thank you, appreciate it i put away money. i was 21, so i said, "hmm, i want to retire at 55." and before you know it, i'm 58 years old. time went by very fast. it goes by too, too fast. ♪ but i would do it again in a heartbeat. [ laughs ] ♪ ♪ . >>> welcome back, everyb
Search Results 64 to 108 of about 109 (some duplicates have been removed)